Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v11 1/2] dt-bindings: spi: add loongson spi | From | zhuyinbo <> | Date | Fri, 2 Jun 2023 14:46:50 +0800 |
| |
在 2023/6/1 下午11:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski 写道: > On 01/06/2023 11:51, zhuyinbo wrote: >>>> Yes, it is make sense as it can reduce the workload of the community. >>>> For the Loongson platform, the versions of spi peripherals are almost >>>> the same, except for a few or individual SoCs. And we have also >>>> discussed compatible internally, and we tend to define it this way. >>> >>> So you have chosen different path than what's clearly recommended by >>> community, existing experience and documentation: >>> >>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.1-rc1/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst#L42 >>> >>> Family names are not accepted as specific compatibles. Whenever they >>> were accepted, it lead to problems. All the time. >> >> >> Thank you for your documentation and advice and the Loongson platform >> have loongson-2h (ls2h), loongson-2k (ls2k), loongson-2p (ls2p) or other >> series SoC, which loongson-2 seems to be the family name you mentioned >> and the "loongson,ls2k-spi" should be a speific compatible name. >> >>> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220822181701.GA89665-robh@kernel.org/ >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/78651e07-6b3e-4243-8e1f-fcd1dfb3ffe1@www.fastmail.com/ >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/288f56ba9cfad46354203b7698babe91@walle.cc/ >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/106e443a-e765-51fe-b556-e4e7e2aa771c@linaro.org/ >>> and many many more discussions. >>> >>> You should choose carefully, because we will keep NAK-ing adding >>> properties to circumvent missing compatibles. >> >> >> I have read the documention and patch link that you mentioned and it >> seems to advice that We don't have wildcard names in the compatible >> string and use wildcard names that will cause issue. and the compatible >> "loongson,ls2k-spi" that wasn't a wildcard names, and if the loongson-2k >> spi controller hardware upgraded or changed the I will use >> "loongson,ls2k-spi-version" as a compatible, such as, >> "loongson,ls2k-spi-v1.1", "loongson,ls2k-spi-v1.1a" or other. > > Versions? Why? They received a lot of comments in the past, let me just > paste to avoid repeating the same: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220926231238.GA3132756-robh@kernel.org/ > > (and many more discussions on devicetree mailing list) >
I didn't notice the following words earlier about compatible in documention and I will use "loongson,ls2k1000-spi" as ls2k1000 SoC spi compatible, which is a very specific compatible.
"For sub-blocks/components of bigger device (e.g. SoC blocks) use rather device-based compatible (e.g. SoC-based compatible), instead of custom versioning of that component.For example use "vendor,soc1234-i2c" instead of "vendor,i2c-v2".
>> >>>> >>>>> Or am I misunderstanding and all ls2k SoCs do work with this driver and >>>>> you were talking about other, future products? >>>> >>>> Actually, in 2k500 has one special type spi was only one cs and their's >>>> register definition was different from common type spi thus this driver >>>> doesn't support but this driver can support another common type spi in >>>> 2k500. for this special type spi I will add support as needed in the >>>> future. >>> >>> Bindings are for hardware, not driver. What does your driver support or >>> does not, matters less. >> >> >> okay, I got it, and the loongson spi bindings was for loongson spi >> controller hardware. if the spi controller hardware not changed in >> different ls2k SoC and the spi compatible should be same thus loongson >> spi compatible seems to be adhere to the bindings aggrement. > > Specific compatible - yes. Unspecific - not, because you disregard the > clear message in the guideline.
okay, I got it.
Thanks.
| |